Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
The HC dismissed the petition for bail and remanded the petitioner in custody. The court held there existed reasonable grounds to believe the petitioner committed offences under s.132(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, for wrongfully availing and passing on ineligible ITC totalling Rs. 19.76 crores, exceeding the statutory threshold. A clerical error in the arrest authorization did not vitiate the reasons to believe, which were otherwise specific and reasoned. As investigation remained incomplete, several co-accused were absconding, and there was a real risk of evidence tampering, the court concluded that bail would impede the probe and therefore refused relief.
The HC dismissed the petition for bail and remanded the petitioner in custody. The court held there existed reasonable grounds to believe the petitioner committed offences under s.132(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, for wrongfully availing and passing on ineligible ITC totalling Rs. 19.76 crores, exceeding the statutory threshold. A clerical error in the arrest authorization did not vitiate the reasons to believe, which were otherwise specific and reasoned. As investigation remained incomplete, several co-accused were absconding, and there was a real risk of evidence tampering, the court concluded that bail would impede the probe and therefore refused relief.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.